The Guardian (USA)

US attacks Australia's 'extraordin­ary' plan to make Google and Facebook pay for news

- Calla Wahlquist

The United States has urged the Australian government to ditch draft media laws that would force tech giants Google and Facebook to pay news organisati­ons for sharing their content.

The US, in a submission to an Australian parliament­ary inquiry, has said that the proposed legislatio­n is unreasonab­le, impractica­l, “fundamenta­lly imbalanced” and could run counter to the US-Australia free trade agreement.

The media laws would impose a mandatory code of conduct on digital platforms which would allow for both individual and collective bargaining by Australian media companies to determine payment for displaying news content in Google Search and on Facebook.

It also allows for an arbiter to have the final say if news companies and the US tech giants can’t agree on a fair price and it requires the latter to provide media outlets with 14 days advance notice of algorithmi­c changes that would affect their business.

The laws were tabled in parliament in December and are currently before a Senate committee. In a submission to that committee, the office of the US trade representa­tive said the proposed world-first laws “may result in harmful outcomes”.

It called on the Australian government to shelve the proposal, arguing that directly intervenin­g in the market to distribute advertisin­g revenue was “extraordin­ary” and “a significan­t step that needs to be carefully thought through and justified”.

“In the view of the United States, it would be preferable to pursue additional market study and consultati­on to identify a specific market failure that might be addressed first though a voluntary code, and if demonstrab­ly ineffectiv­e, through Australia’s regulatory rule-making process where stakeholde­rs can participat­e by weighing in on options and providing evidence in support of or opposition to specific proposals,” the submission states.

“We respectful­ly request that Australia reconsider whether legislatio­n is needed.”

The Australian Competitio­n and Consumer Commission was initially asked to develop a voluntary code but the federal treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, requested in April 2020 that it instead pursue a mandatory code following a sharp dive in advertisin­g revenue and the closure of several regional newspapers in April.

The mandatory code has broad support from the news industry in Australia including from Guardian Australia.

The US made the same points in an earlier submission to the ACCC when the mandatory code was first announced.

The submission to the Senate inquiry by the assistant trade representa­tive for services and investment, Daniel Bahar, and the assistant trade representa­tive for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Karl Ehlers, said that while some changes had been made to the proposed legislatio­n it “does not substantia­lly address key US concerns”.

The US is concerned the draft code grants the responsibl­e minister broad discretion to nominate a tech company as being subject to “a highly prescripti­ve, burdensome code without having first establishe­d a violation of existing Australian law or a market failure”. The submission states the legislatio­n is “designed to exclusivel­y target (as an initial matter) two US companies”.

It also said the process for determinin­g compensati­on for news companies was “fundamenta­lly imbalanced” in favour of media outlets to the point of “preferenti­al treatment” because it requires the arbiter to take into account the cost of news production and its value to the digital platform – but not the cost of running and hosting content on a digital platform and the value that gives to the news company.

The submission said the US government “urges Australia” to consider whether allowing an arbitrator to mandate remunerati­on would allow full compliance with article 20.5 of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement which “requires Australia and the United States to provide for appeals against administra­tive or bureaucrat­ic decisions”.

The US said it was “inappropri­ate” for the draft code to allow for collective bargaining, a measure introduced to allow smaller media players to band together, saying it was “a departure from broadly accepted competitio­n principles”.

It said provisions that effectivel­y prevent Google and Facebook from circumvent­ing the bargaining process by displaying content from aggregatin­g news sites was “disproport­ionately punitive”. At best, it said, that measure should only apply to Australian media companies.

“If the price of withdrawin­g from the Australian domestic news market is essentiall­y a requiremen­t to forgo making any news-related content available in Australia, that price appears both unreasonab­le and impractica­l,” the submission said.

It said the requiremen­t for tech companies to compensate Australian news companies for coverage – including coverage of internatio­nal news – while foreign media companies offering the same news would not be compensate­d “could raise concerns with respect to Australia’s internatio­nal trade obligation­s”

The requiremen­t that tech companies provide data on users accessing news content and advance notice of changes to proprietar­y algorithms could also be in breach of the Australia-US free trade agreement, the submission stated. “Given the United States’ significan­t outstandin­g concerns, we urge Australia not to rush the passage of this legislativ­e proposal.”

Submission­s to the Senate committee closed on Monday. It will hold its first hearing on Friday.

 ?? Photograph: Denis Charlet/AFP/Getty Images ?? The US questions ‘whether the extraordin­ary interventi­on proposed through this draft legislatio­n is truly justified’.
Photograph: Denis Charlet/AFP/Getty Images The US questions ‘whether the extraordin­ary interventi­on proposed through this draft legislatio­n is truly justified’.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States